What?! No “love” for John Brown?!

Just an observation, but May 9 came and went a week ago today with not so much as one post about John Brown. Actually, until earlier this week, I didn’t have a clue that JB was born on May 9 (hmmm, a stubborn Taurus…). Rather, Brown had been defined, at least in my “memory”, by his efforts at Harper’s Ferry.

This year marks his 110th birthday, but, I suppose as America’s most well-known domestic terrorist, he won’t be getting his own day on the National calendar. Before anyone flies off the handle here, let me be clear. For his raid on Harper’s Ferry, I see JB as guilty of treason, of that there is no doubt. Likewise, I believe that he was beyond passionate for his cause, even fitting well into the definition of fanatic. On the other hand, I see his cause (an explosive catalyst in the road to the freedom of slaves) as having foundations in the law of morality… but then, I’m writing as someone who lives in the beginning of the 21st century. I would say that the majority of us find no sympathy for those who wish to hold others in slavery, but would we go so far as to advocate something akin to John Brown’s raid (and his extended plan) today? Best not to answer that, because we cannot today, put ourselves anywhere near the mindset that existed at the time. I would be willing to bet that my own people from that time, from the central Shenandoah Valley, to western Maryland, and into southern Pa., were incredibly unnerved when word of Brown’s efforts hit the streets.

Yet, May 9 is not the date on which this event took place. It is his date of birth, and with it comes a curiosity for John Brown, the overall man, not simply defined by one or two events in which he was the central figure. I think the first time I became aware of Brown was when I was quite young, watching Santa Fe Trail. Thus, Raymond Massey’s portrayal of Brown set my tone of understanding, at least for a number of years. That long, intense gaze cut through the air like a laser and gave the impression that Brown was quite mad.

The first real screen portrayal that comes to mind is Raymond Massey in Santa Fe Trail (1940). Despite criticism of the comments of one of a portrayal of a female slave in the film (specifically, her comment, “Mr. Brown done promised us freedom, but… if this is freedom, I don’t want no part of it”), I believe that those held in slavery at the time had mixed opinions, and this comment could well reflect one of those opinions. (I prefer the B&W version over the color, and this clip happens to be in B&W… much better!).

Also in that year, there was a brief appearance by John Cromwell as JB in Abe Lincoln in Illinois (apparently, this was so forgettable that I need to go back and see it again just so I can see how little space is taken-up by the portrayal). Sorry to say, I can’t find a clip of Cromwell’s performance on YouTube…

I have yet to see Seven Angry Men (1955) in which Raymond Massey reprised his role as Brown, but, in the second performance, I understand that he gave “the role the right mixture of fanaticism and normality the part requires”… (fortunately, someone was obsessed enough with Debra Paget to want to post at least portions of this movie in YouTube). I am planning on watching this film for the first time in the coming week.

Then, in 1982, there was the portrayal by Sterling Hayden in The Blue and the Gray (1982)… another performance that doesn’t seem to stand out in my memory. (As in the case of the Brown portrayal in Abe Lincoln in Illinois, I can’t find a clip for this movie on YouTube).

So, who does it best? All the other historical inaccuracies aside, who is closest to the real John Brown?

Oh, and on a side note… it appears that Quentin Tarantino stated on two occasions (2007 and 2009) that he would like to write, direct, and star in a film about JB. I think this is probably more than a little disturbing to a number of folks who would prefer a historically accurate portrayal of Brown, based on solid studies.

Thanks for remembering John Brown on his birthday. Brown actually has a number of contemporary Southern admirers, most notably including Larry Lawrence, a sports book collector and businessman and the founder and chairman of the John Brown Society in New York City (native Georgian) and Norman Marshall, a veteran actor who does a terrific one-man play portraying Brown (native Virginian). The criminologist piece which you cite is pretty biased and can easily be debunked. It is one of two fairly useless essays in that book, and that book is of little use to serious John Brown biographers (except for the first section) because it is largely so much creative writing.

From my point of view, Brown got lots of recognition, favorable and otherwise, a few months back when the anniversary of Harpers Ferry rolled around.

And for my blog, I only like to mention birthdays on occasion. Figures that factor into the theme of my blog. Perhaps T.J. Rodman. Maybe John Brooke to be balanced. You know, guys who had an impact on history that can be measured in iron!

Your point is well taken. Just look at the contemporary illustrations depicting Brown. On the other side of things, how about Edmund Ruffin? I would consider him somewhat the antithesis of Brown. Is there a parallel misinterpretation due “memory” there?

Excellent point about Ruffin, and I agree. In fact, the fire-eaters and their pressure to make the Southern states secede (and the deception involved) has been a topic that I have been considering for a post.

Unless you are considered one of the top tier “Great Americans” like Washington, Lincoln and King than not much is made of someone’s birthday. How many people will actually know when Lee and Grant’s birthday is? On top of that John Brown is probably the most controversial person in the Civil War and will bring about a very heated debate which many bloggers and message board moderators would like to stay away from.

Coly, Yes, but to be honest, I would be interested to hear the varied, and generally incorrect responses if a reporter stood in the middle of a crowd, and asked when Washington, Lincoln, or King were born. As for mentioning Brown in this post, I’m sure some disagree with my views, but I don’t see a heated debate forthcoming. I’d also argue that any discussion of Brown is more relevant now because of the approaching Sesquicentennial.

In my study of US history I see Brown and his Raid as the act that set the Nation on the course of CW and the close of any peaceful political options. I group Brown and Nat Turner together as Murderous men who in the end got what they deserved and IMO neither deserve any respect or rememberances other than what is needed to understand the CW and Slavery in America. I find memorials to these 2 men sicken.

Mike, I don’t agree that HF marked the close of any peaceful political solutions. Did it inflame the situation? Yes, but a peaceful solution was still very much a possibility, even into late 1860 and early 1861. At the very least, the upper South was not a sure bet for secession, even despite the raid being in Virginia. As for memorials and respect or remembrance, that wasn’t what this post was about. Rather, realizing it was his birthday caused me to stop and think about the person, not just the Brown of Kansas and HF. As I mentioned, he was, without a doubt, guilty of treason, and the methods he used to see to the end of slavery were beyond extreme. Still, he could very well be seen as a martyr and hero to some. My focus, however, is as a historian, not as one seeking praise for anyone… and I was very curious to see comments about what others thought about the portrayal of Brown, and which performance came closest, if any, to the Brown as understood thorough the best biographical studies on the man.

I didn’t go on because I was trying to stay on focus about Brown and his impact. Your correct Abe could have accepted the CSA and sent people to work out payment for Federal Property seized and normalized relations. But Passions on both sides were too hot by 1860 for cooler heads to previal.

I wouldn’t jump so quickly to put the blame at Lincoln’s feet. I’m afraid that’s a major part of the problem in the Lincoln-bashing among new era Confederate celebrationists over the last few years. The hardcore secessionists of the lower South did much to contribute to the exacerbation of the problems, and that fact is continually and conveniently ignored by some who want to point out that all the blame fell on Lincoln. Following the election of Lincoln, secession advocates of the lower South went too far, and that includes the spread of fear (which they had initiated even before the election was complete) and domination of the secession conventions, without the support of the common people. As I’ve pointed out in quotes from a newspaper in the Shenandoah Valley, the upper South wasn’t blind that the move to secession in the lower South was without the consent of the people….but later, there is the great “illusion” that Virginia actually waited to finalize secession with a referendum… not to mention the coercion of the vote.

Before laying blame on anyone during this time of national insanity (1860-61), I’d caution anyone to take one step at a time in considering the road taken to secession at that time, and to consider the bigger picture, and that the fire-eaters were smack in the center of the mess, agitating all the way.

So Robert how far do you want to go back? I would say to the Texas problem when several in New England talked of secession if Texas came into the Union. I much as I personally dislike Abe I am not trying to sandbag the man. Both sides were guilty of Rhetoric that kept cooler heads from keeping us out of War.

John Browns actions threw gas on the fears of the South and the anti Slave Passions of the North.

No, I don’t see the Texas situation being the start. I’d say we’d start with the compromises over whether the territories be free or slave states.

“John Browns actions threw gas on the fears of the South and the anti Slave Passions of the North.”

John Brown’s HF raid drew fear from more than just the South. All you have to do is take a look at Chambersburg papers to see how they reacted over the incident. Yet, in the South, the fear was for something else, centered on slavery and the belief that Brown’s actions may be the start of a series of events led by abolitionists. But really, who was as radical as Brown to carry out those actions? The fear was greater than the actual threat, but then, the same could be said of the perceived threat of Lincoln’s election.

I should probably add that it’s easier to say, looking back on it, 150 years after the fact, that the fear was greater than the threat. Still, I’d say that those who wanted secession anyway, made fear a factor in some who may have been on the fence of whether or not there was a real need to fear.

I think that Raymond Massey in Seven Angry Men did the best job. What I remember about that movie was the tension between John Brown and one of his sons . I don’t know if that kind of tension existed between Brown and his sons but it did make for a good movie.